Apple's Enterprise Business: Perception vs. Reality
 |
by
November 12th, 2008
"People only see what they are prepared to see."
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
On Tuesday, it was reported here at TMO that Al Shipp, Apple's former Sr. V.P. of Enterprise Sales at Apple is leaving and won't be replaced. That alone creates an unwarranted perception that Apple's on-again, off-again affair with the enterprise is waning. However, that's not the whole story. The real story is more interesting and more revealing.
Apple's relationship with the enterprise is an endeavor that everyone who dislikes Apple or has an attitude loves to hate. Apple doesn't play by conventional rules in the enterprise because, in fact, Microsoft sets the rules and plays the game. As a result, when there's a convulsion in the Apple-enterprise sphere, pundits fire up their text editors and start to look for synonyms for Doom and Gloom.
The Perception
Right out of the gate, I'll admit that the departure of Al Shipp looks bad. When someone in a key enterprise position leaves and isn't replaced, the easy, comfortable assumption is that Apple has yet again fumbled away the enterprise market. I expect to see, after TMO broke the news, several stories elsewhere that have a certain, "I told you so," flavor to them. Apple doesn't "get" the enterprise and never will while Microsoft does. So there. That's what they'll say.
Indeed, I will admit that it looks bad on the surface. When Apple acquires high profile people, like Mark Papermaster or loses someone like Tony Fadell, everyone likes to read the tea leaves and draw conclusions about Apple. Those public conclusions often paint a picture that's not accurate, and indeed can paint Apple into a corner.
It's Apple secrecy that causes the problem. Most other companies would, at least, paint their own picture that purports to explain, in a rational way, why the change is happening. That way, if a reporter goes off half-cocked, Apple can calmly point to their press release as their side, the official story.
For a company for whom perception is everything, Apple allows observers to develop wild misperceptions. It's almost as if executives at Apple love to see mistakes made by writers and then revel in how lousy the press is. It's a happy and comfortable conceit.
The Reality
The sales numbers for Apple specifically in the enterprise aren't public. However, there is evidence, both direct and indirect, that Apple's enterprise sales are doing just fine. In fact, it's not the sales that are fluctuating, but rather the public perception of them, based on various reports and interpretations from time to time.
In addition, to fully appreciate Apple's approach to the enterprise, it's essential to understand Steve Jobs' attitude about sales. Mr. Jobs has made some sharp public comments about Steve Ballmer being a salesman, with the implication that the Microsoft CEO is not a very technical person and will eventually ruin that company.
Also, I have been in a meeting with Steve Jobs in which he had some sharp and negative things to say about sales people -- even though he realized that he also needs them. Executives can do that -- synthesize ideas rather that seize on just one side or the other.
What's ultimately the key here is that Steve Jobs believes that people should want to buy a great computer. Selling them is a great idea, if the customer is willing to believe that buying the best product is the right thing to do. But cleverly and deceptively maneuvering a customer into a sale, when they're playing you against the competition, is not Mr. Jobs' religion.
As a result, Apple behaves in unaccustomed ways when dealing with enterprise customers:
- Apple doesn't allow itself to be locked in, losing degrees of freedom, in product design or longevity.
- Apple believes that customers should want to come to Apple because Apple makes the best computers in the world.
- Apple believes that a company can sell the best or be the biggest, but not both.
This is the only way Apple can approach enterprise customers who are often in the throes of a painful but profitable love affair with Microsoft. In fact, IT people who aren't very technical love to play one vendor against the other to get the best price but not necessarily the best product or the best service for their customers.
Nothing's Changed
Apple's 10-K report for Fiscal 2008, for the first time, mentions the enterprise.
"The company sells to consumer, small and mid-sized business ("SMB"), education, enterprise, government, and creative consumers."
That's a statement of market direction and intent backed up by growing sales in the enterprise, not declining sales.
One way Apple is selling to the enterprise, in an industry controlled by Microsoft, is a back-door halo effect that undermines Windows Mobile with the iPhone and creates a demand for the corresponding excellence of Macintosh products. Another is to let the consumer enthusiasm for great products seep into the consciousness of business people. Just take a look at Tim Cook's introduction on October 14 of the new MacBooks. His comments reveal Apple's approach for anyone willing to listen. One in particular struck me as more than self-serving elitism. It's Apple's mantra.
"The Macintosh is far superior to anything else on the market," TIm Cook said.
If you don't believe that, you're not going to become an Apple customer, no matter what the salesman says. Accordingly, Apple isn't going to bend over much for the naysayers who walk a different path.
Being an Apple Customer on Apple's Terms
The bottom line is that Apple is going to approach enterprise on its own terms. The company needs inside sales and field sales people to close the deals and take the money. However, when it comes to an enterprise sales strategy, Apple doesn't really want, for example, whiney IT people asking Apple's factory to disable the camera in the MacBooks for security reasons. They don't want some government agency demanding that Apple produce the PowerMac G5 until the year 2017. Ultimately, what Apple does want is for customers to come to its products on their own free will.
If Apple sales executives do well at sending that message of excellence and garnering the same level of sales that drives consumers into a frenzy when a new iPod touch or MacBook Air comes out, then great. If not, there are plenty of of those darned Apple sales guys who'd like to give it try.
I don't know why Mr. Shipp is leaving. It could be personal or it could be a power struggle or difference of opinion with Sr. V.P. John Brandon. Or it could be, just like with many Apple employees, that his euphemistic tour of duty came to a natural close. However, one thing that's not likely to happen as a result is reduced emphasis on selling more Macs to more business customers. Mr. Brandon has a history of low profile and high success.
For the foreseeable future, there will be enterprise customers and writers who don't get that part of Apple and want to force the company into a traditional mold. It won't happen on the watch of Steve Jobs or Tim Cook.
John Martellaro is a senior scientist and author. A former U.S. Air Force officer,he has worked for NASA, White Sands Missile Range, Lockheed Martin Astronautics, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Apple Computer. During his five years at Apple, he worked as a Senior Marketing Manager for science and technology, Federal Account Executive, and High Performance Computing Manager. His interests include alpine skiing, SciFi, astronomy, and Perl. John lives in Denver, Colorado.
Hidden Dimensions Archives.
Observer Comments
Well thought out and insightful article that points out the flaws in other stories about Apple and enterprise.
Apple does what it wants to do and not what others think that it should do. Sure, it's a live or die philosophy, but so far, they're doing just fine and meeting their own expectations. And not having to deal with whiny IT people who just don't get it.
Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:58 am Subject: I love the comment about IT
QuoteApple doesn't play by conventional rules in the enterprise because, in fact, Microsoft sets the rules
This is one of the most profound statements you've made. It is true of not only the enterprise but all of Apple's business. It is the reason so many in the industry, especially Win-centric media types don't understand Apple and are always shorting and deriding Apple. Apple plays by Apple's rules. Apple assumes that quality will win in the end.
Great story but it misses a key point.
The main issues have nothing to do with the enterprise but rather Apple's ability to work with the reseller partner.
Some in Apple believe that you should build a large internal sales organization and sell directly without resellers to enterprise level customers. That model has been going in and out of style at Apple for at least 20 years. The cost associated direct sales and resellers causes channel conflict. It may be hard to believe but the finance group at Apple is the key element. They wield the power. Apple cannot maintain margins, generate demand and pay both internal sales and resellers.
As John knows enterprise customers require sales people to help develop solutions, marshal resources and close deals to increase Apple sales beyond the consumer. Mr. Shipp did an excellent job growing this business. The problem was doing it at a cost that Apple internal finance could live with and that Mr. Cook was not getting phone calls from angry reseller partners.
It is clear that Apple must come up with a sustainable model for the enterprise that grows the business and includes the cost effective use of partners.
Apple's current sales team will excel at providing the best results; they just need to be able to do their job without worrying if they will get paid for their effort. The same can be said for the resellers.
The camera removal issue isn't just from IT people, it's a security policy issue that all government and many corporate installations face. "We" aren't whining, we're asking for a great product without a feature that causes a significant security vulnerability. We are trying to get approval for software disablement and it would be nice if Apple were to include this feature as one of their managed options, but that hasn't worked yet either. We have many scientists who demand Macs but are having problems getting them because of that little camera. Mr. Jobs needs to listen a little more to his federal sales group when simple solutions like this are suggested. I spend way too much time addressing all the security issues with Windows systems while typing away on my Mac. I don't want to lose my Mac but I will if Apple puts a camera in every single computer and display they make and there isn't an easy way to disable it.
Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:46 am Subject: Re: whiney IT people
QuoteAnonymous wrote:
The camera removal issue isn't just from IT people, it's a security policy issue that all government and many corporate installations face. "We" aren't whining, we're asking for a great product without a feature that causes a significant security vulnerability. We are trying to get approval for software disablement and it would be nice if Apple were to include this feature as one of their managed options, but that hasn't worked yet either. We have many scientists who demand Macs but are having problems getting them because of that little camera. Mr. Jobs needs to listen a little more to his federal sales group when simple solutions like this are suggested. I spend way too much time addressing all the security issues with Windows systems while typing away on my Mac. I don't want to lose my Mac but I will if Apple puts a camera in every single computer and display they make and there isn't an easy way to disable it.
If I were in a situation that an active camera built into my mac were a problem, I'd simply place a small piece of black tape over the camera. Problem solved.
That being said, the point about Apple simply providing a way to turn the camera off using system settings is a valid one.
One other point, though, in relation to Apple responding to the needs of enterprise.
I don't think Apple wants to get in the business of pleasing enterprise. They accommodate in one place, and they'll be asked to accommodate in another before they can blink. So where do they draw the line? Some things, like the ability to simply turn off an embedded camera could possibly have use in the general market, also. But other demands, not so much.
Apple's approach to enterprise seems to be that businesses which can get what they want from off-the-shelf computers can benefit greatly by switching over to Apple computers. But enterprises which have special needs would only end up hampering Apple down the road when they decide it is time to move on to another architecture. If they have a number of hundred-million dollar accounts that cannot move on, they'll end up in the same tail spin of backward compatibility that has MS so bogged down. As such, enterprise with special needs is not a market Apple really wants to get involved with.
Before I retired, I accidently discovered that the Windows laptops that our company was purchasing had a live microphone when using NetMeeting (as configured by IT). When I pointed this out to IT and to Security, I was ignored. When I asked about getting a Mac laptop I was told by IT that they were concerned with the built-in mic and camera (among other concerns like single source). Obviously a double standard. Since IT had already made the decision that all Windows computers were OK, they had to ignore the audio security concern with the Windows laptops.
What's the deal with a stupid computer camera? It doesn't have to be turned on. If you're worried about some mal-ware turning the camera on then you need to stop thinking like a Microsoftie. Besides what info can be transmitted that can't be sent by other means? Do you strip-search your loyal employees for pocket cameras, phones, music players and thumb drives, too?
Gimme a break. The camera problem is just anti-Mac FUD. As usual.
Quotezewazir wrote:QuoteAnonymous wrote:
The camera removal issue isn't just from IT people, it's a security policy issue that all government and many corporate installations face. .... I don't want to lose my Mac but I will if Apple puts a camera in every single computer and display they make and there isn't an easy way to disable it.
If I were in a situation that an active camera built into my mac were a problem, I'd simply place a small piece of black tape over the camera. Problem solved.
That being said, the point about Apple simply providing a way to turn the camera off using system settings is a valid one.
Sorry, but you obviously haven't worked for a government agency. A piece of tape, unless it's a TID (tamper indication device), is not acceptable. Peel it off, use the camera, then put it back on. That doesn't provide any security. We've had people put opaque epoxy over the camera (and into USB ports as well) but the least destructive method for disabling a camera or port is by a well-managed software process. I'm not making up these requirements. I've worked for a government contractor going on 29 years, managing mainly Mac-based systems since 1987, moving to the computer security organization 2.5 years ago. These are real problems in need of real solutions.
QuoteAnonymous wrote:
What's the deal with a stupid computer camera? It doesn't have to be turned on. If you're worried about some mal-ware turning the camera on then you need to stop thinking like a Microsoftie. Besides what info can be transmitted that can't be sent by other means? Do you strip-search your loyal employees for pocket cameras, phones, music players and thumb drives, too?
Gimme a break. The camera problem is just anti-Mac FUD. As usual.
Please read my other comments. This is not anti-Mac FUD. We have armed guards at our gates who do search vehicles and personnel. We also have restrictive policies on what electronic devices can be brought on site. Thumb drives? Read the news articles about people using those devices to steal government information. I'm not worried about malware turning a camera on, I'm worried about the insider threat. People make dumb mistakes and that's why there are security organizations making and enforcing policies to try and reduce the exfiltration of data. You're right, I could email any document I wanted to but we also filter our outgoing email.
Draconian "security" efforts only keep the honest from doing their jobs. Take a look at this:
<http://www.thinkgeek.com/computing/drives/ab63/?cpg=81T>
It's a flash drive that looks like a common garden-variety broken USB cable. You need to add this to the picture-book you give to the, um, gentlemen at the gate.
My point is that you can outlaw all manner of devices and a determined spy is going to walk in with something you never thought of before. Do you check to make sure they are not wearing one of those USB watches? Do you check for hollow places in the heel of their shoes?
Outlawing cameras on computers is only a finger in the dike. Why bother? Oh, I forgot, because some people (fewer and fewer, thankfully) don't like Macs. Evidently, since mics in windows laptops are ok (see someone else's note above).
QuoteGuest wrote:QuoteAnonymous wrote:
What's the deal with a stupid computer camera? It doesn't have to be turned on. If you're worried about some mal-ware turning the camera on then you need to stop thinking like a Microsoftie. Besides what info can be transmitted that can't be sent by other means? Do you strip-search your loyal employees for pocket cameras, phones, music players and thumb drives, too?
Gimme a break. The camera problem is just anti-Mac FUD. As usual.
Please read my other comments. This is not anti-Mac FUD. We have armed guards at our gates who do search vehicles and personnel. We also have restrictive policies on what electronic devices can be brought on site. Thumb drives? Read the news articles about people using those devices to steal government information. I'm not worried about malware turning a camera on, I'm worried about the insider threat. People make dumb mistakes and that's why there are security organizations making and enforcing policies to try and reduce the exfiltration of data. You're right, I could email any document I wanted to but we also filter our outgoing email.
Samsung doesn't allow camera phones inside their own facilities. And they don't make a phone without one....
Virtually every one of my commercial clients bans camera phones, and other electronic recording devices from their facilities. Your briefcase is searched and any banned devices are "coat checked" with the security desk. A couple companies even silicone up every USB port on company computers.
Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:47 pm Subject: Re: whiney IT people
QuoteAnonymous wrote:Quotezewazir wrote:QuoteAnonymous wrote:
The camera removal issue isn't just from IT people, it's a security policy issue that all government and many corporate installations face. .... I don't want to lose my Mac but I will if Apple puts a camera in every single computer and display they make and there isn't an easy way to disable it.
If I were in a situation that an active camera built into my mac were a problem, I'd simply place a small piece of black tape over the camera. Problem solved.
That being said, the point about Apple simply providing a way to turn the camera off using system settings is a valid one.
Sorry, but you obviously haven't worked for a government agency. A piece of tape, unless it's a TID (tamper indication device), is not acceptable. Peel it off, use the camera, then put it back on. That doesn't provide any security. We've had people put opaque epoxy over the camera (and into USB ports as well) but the least destructive method for disabling a camera or port is by a well-managed software process. I'm not making up these requirements. I've worked for a government contractor going on 29 years, managing mainly Mac-based systems since 1987, moving to the computer security organization 2.5 years ago. These are real problems in need of real solutions.
So use a TID type covering. Retail outlets use labels that cannot be removed without destroying them. Software vendors tape their boxes shut with tape that cannot be removed without leaving obvious tamper evidence. The point is it is possible to use low tech solutions that do not demand the maker(s) of your electronic equipment to alter their products for your specialized needs in internal security.
So once again, professionals who wish Apple would do things differently are labeled as IT whiners by the brainwashed Mac masses. Look, it is the right and obligation of customers to make their needs known to vendors. I'd say from the content of some of these posts that many of you have never worked in a large company with hundreds of desktops to support, five-year replacement forecast budgets that require top executive approval, and security needs that go far beyond those of some l'il Web shop. But for years, Apple's commitment to enterprise customers has been unpredictable.
I'm fortunate to have been a senior Mac admin for two decades. I rarely have to deal with other platforms, and I am Mac through and through. I guess I have to say all that just to establish my bona fides for the fanboys. Now I need to say that Apple stands to lose its presence in my industry for not addressing the kind of needs that some of you label as whiny. Apple's making plenty of money and selling plenty of Macs without us, so obviously they may decide they can afford to lose us. I hope that doesn't happen. For one thing, it will affect my career. For another, it will harm our users. It might even harm Apple in the long run.
Apple's problems in the large-business market are too many to mention in one post, so let's take a simple example. Let's say we decide Mac Minis are great for our hundreds of cubicle dwellers. I might decide to buy Minis in 2009 and again in 2013. I'll budget accordingly. Then 2009 rolls around and Apple has decided to drop the Mini -- and there's no longer a Mac at that price point that will do the job. I look bad, we can't meet our users' needs, and Apple gets another black eye.
And because executives have seen Apple be this unpredictable for years, they will ask hard questions if I try to budget like that in the first place. And I've explained this to Apple till I've run out of spit, and it hasn't done any good. (Now somebody's going to point out that the Mini is going to be around for a long time, blah blah blah. I used that as an example because it represents about the only affordable cubicle Mac out there. And since Apple promises nothing, who knows when the Mini will die?)
These same executives are confident that for years down the road, they will be able to buy a cubicle-class Dell, just as they have for a long, long time, at prices equal to or less than what they are paying now. Apple won't compete. Not can't, but won't. It's Apple's call, to be sure, but it's not whiny to make the case for what works for us, as Mac professionals in a Mac-using market.
Apple won't compete. Not can't, but won't.
They don't want to. So what's the big deal??????????? They've made that decision and moved on. Are corporate IT departments and management getting that many requests from their users to buy Macs? That ought to tell them something in itself. They're either unsatisfied with what they have because they are severely limited, or they're sick of the OS they're working on. They cannot even install their own software. So, my big question is this, why are you buying them computers and not just giving them dumb terminals anymore? Could it be there was a paradigm shift that "enabling employees to be more independent and creative" sort of caught the IT world off-guard and suddenly there were actual issues to deal with other than a burned out amber monitor? (yeah, I've been here THAT long at a university to remember the changeover from Telex to Zenith PCs, to ASTs, and finally to Macs. We deal with the issues ourselves. If you don't think universities deal with privacy, security, intellectual property, and research secrets, you've got another thing coming. We do. But we also have EVERY OS out there, probably one of nearly every piece of computer equipment, and even cameras and USB devices. But we deal with them.
Corporate paranoia has gotten out of control. You reap what you sow.
The core problem is that fast paced innovation is incompatible with what the IT departments need and require. The day Jobs agrees to accommodate the needs and requirements of big business and government agencies will be the day all the brilliant innovators in Apple will begin to hand in their resignations and Apple will no longer be the Apple we know and love. Apple will cease to be the only thing between all of us and Microsoft. The problem is for you IT executives to solve for yourself, or just stick with Microsoft. Apple is for you to take or leave, and bless good old Steve Jobs or that. A highly principled man!
Ok - I am still missing something.. somebody uses a camera to take a photo of something secret (other than their nose hair)... they still have to get the photo out of the organisation... which requires email (screened, tracked, traceable), USB key (easily disabled via Workgroup Manager) or CD/DVD (also easily disabled via Workgroup Manager).
Lastly - the Leopard Security config provides instructions for disabling iSight if you are desperate:
# Securing Video Recording Hardware
# -----------------------------
# Remove Video Recording kernel extensions.
# Remove external iSight camera.
srm -rf /System/Library/Extensions/Apple_iSight.kext
# Remove internal iSight camera.
srm -rf /System/Library/Extensions/IOUSBFamily.kext/Contents/PlugIns/\
AppleUSBVideoSupport.kext
# Remove Extensions cache files.
touch /System/Library/Extensions
Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:45 pm Subject: Sorry John
QuoteGuest wrote:
Why not consider a Mac Mini in order to have a Mac with no camera?
Or a Macintosh Pro with a camera free monitor.
No the thing is that some people working in high security jobs, be they military/intel or private sector, is that they want MacBooks and currently all of those models come with built in cameras. Now even if they could be turned off with a software switch then could probably be turned back on by someone is up to no good. Someone hell bent on espionage is going to find a way, but of course we don't want to make easy for them.
John I want to apologize for taking this story off on a tangent about whiney ITs and cameras. Back in the '80s I worked in a high security job for a 4 star Admiral, when the Walker scandal was still fresh in our memories, but that was not the reason for my glib comment. We had an IT guy who was the inspiration for the term "pencil necked geek." As good as he was in his job he was very annoying to be work with, very whiney. Other IT people there were great to work with hence my qualifier that they are not all whiney pains in the butt.
I'm not a pencil necked geek but I do whine a lot at work. The point of the discussions above show that there is a divide in understanding between normal users and enterprise/corporate/government users. I'm in both camps but am employed in the latter. It doesn't really matter what we try to do to secure a system, it's the perception that we're doing something that matters.
As others have stated, there are ways to software disable certain functions in all Macs but the powers in Washington can only see what they can touch, or in this matter can't. The company I work for continues to get more money for guards and guns than for computer security because politicians know what a guard is. The trouble is, data exfiltration is happening through the internet, not through the front gate. I can totally understand why Apple does not put all their efforts into supporting some of the insane and crazy enterprise requests but they do as good a job in supporting us as any of the other computer vendors do.
Our Apple sales and technical representatives have talked to our IT staff, when they will listen, until there's nothing left to say. The IT staff directs everything and until we get an IT manager who's willing to look at Macs (again), then it doesn't really matter what Apple does, our company won't listen. This is the real problem with Apple's perceived lack of support. Apple will support companies but the IT managers have to be willing to "Think Different" about their operation instead of being one of the Microsoft sheep.
I'm done for the day. Thanks for the lively discussion.
Apple completely lacks the basic detail of how to sell to enterprise.
Having "Appleized" a regional insurance company, I looked to apple for basic help Like a list of business savvy ACN (Apple Consultant Network) consultants. They did not even know their own resources. Or worse were prohibited from recommending one consultant on their list over another.
Ask them for bulk purchasing, they tell you to go to the Apple store unless you want an Xserve. (I wanted 300 desktops!)
Ask them for specific software soloutions, they refer you to version tracker.
And iCal? Don't try to reschedule an appointment or look for a conference room and free time in 3 peoples schedule. (BTW apple does not use it internally.....)
Apple could grab a toe hold in Enterprise if they would just put a tiny bt of effort into it.
It go so bad that my CTO and I actually had
"It's almost as if executives at Apple love to see mistakes made by writers and then revel in how lousy the press is. It's a happy and comfortable conceit."
You mean, the press that trumpeted to the world years ago that Apple was going belly-up? THAT press? The press that then never, ever admitted how wrong THEY had gotten the story? Yeah, how could Jobs get a bad taste in his mouth about THAT.
Here you will find some comments from one ex-Apple Enterprise guy about how things (don't) work at Apple:
http://viewfromthemountain.typepad.com/applepeels/
Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:32 am Subject: Re: It's not whiny
QuoteAnonymous wrote:
Apple's problems in the large-business market are too many to mention in one post, so let's take a simple example. Let's say we decide Mac Minis are great for our hundreds of cubicle dwellers. I might decide to buy Minis in 2009 and again in 2013. I'll budget accordingly. Then 2009 rolls around and Apple has decided to drop the Mini -- and there's no longer a Mac at that price point that will do the job. I look bad, we can't meet our users' needs, and Apple gets another black eye.
And because executives have seen Apple be this unpredictable for years, they will ask hard questions if I try to budget like that in the first place. And I've explained this to Apple till I've run out of spit, and it hasn't done any good. (Now somebody's going to point out that the Mini is going to be around for a long time, blah blah blah. I used that as an example because it represents about the only affordable cubicle Mac out there. And since Apple promises nothing, who knows when the Mini will die?)
These same executives are confident that for years down the road, they will be able to buy a cubicle-class Dell, just as they have for a long, long time, at prices equal to or less than what they are paying now. Apple won't compete. Not can't, but won't. It's Apple's call, to be sure, but it's not whiny to make the case for what works for us, as Mac professionals in a Mac-using market.
This is the perfect scenario to explain why Apple Corp. does not WANT to get into the enterprise market in any big way.
Enterprise needs are such that they make their purchasing plans 5-10 years out. Apple does not want to be tied down to an implied commitment to those future plans. It would bog them down from moving on to the next thing as they see fit for the Apple brand of computer and/or Apple's operating system and integrated software.
OTOH, if enterprise wants to get into Apple in a big way, then enterprise will have to accept the idea that they may not be able to plan to buy 300 Mac Minis in 2013. Plan to buy whatever Apple has in their low-end, mass market division of computers. It's not THAT big a step.
Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:11 pm Subject: It's the NON-IT types who are whiny
I don't understand the animosity toward IT in these posts (and in countless others on other Mac-oriented sites). There are large IT shops where Macs are well-represented and supported, and even predominate. We are just saying it'd be good for Apple to acknowledge the hardware needs so we can keep our users and managers happy, and look forward to long careers supporting Macs.
No, Apple can't be all things to enterprise. But offering enterprise-only roadmaps that provide some level of predictability at certain price points would not damage anything other than Steve Jobs' ego. And, I guess, the Macfans who believe that any company with more than five Macs is some sort of abomination. (Hey, we may have lots of Macs in my outfit, but I do wear blue jeans to work frequently -- doesn't that count for anything?)
Somebody said Apple wasn't interested in helping them with consultants, volume buys or software -- and referred them to Version Tracker. That statement is so far from the Apple I know that I find it hard to believe. The folks I've worked with in Apple's enterprise areas are top-notch, helpful, likable people. And they are as frustrated as I sometimes am to be limited by Apple's blind spots in what we do. On the flip side, Apple does offer great training, consulting and resources for businesses, and we take advantage of those all the time.
So really, for us, it comes down to a predictable hardware and development roadmap. Things like taking Firewire off Macbooks without warning hurt us.
One more thing: Much is made of the Mac home-user putting pressure on businesses to bring Macs in. I also have seen it work the other way: Our corporate Mac users have bought lots of Macs for home and family use through the years because of getting to know Macs on the job.
There's room for both Mac camps in this world, and we ought to work together to help Apple make all the gains it can, not bash each other.
Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:08 pm Subject: Re: It's the NON-IT types who are whiny
Quotepgb0517 wrote:
So really, for us, it comes down to a predictable hardware and development roadmap.
And it is long range predictability that Apple does not want to get locked into. In the first place, they warn in advance of an upcoming change in their product line, it will get out even more than current. While the rumor mill tends to see things coming anyway, there is still a certain level of mystique - and thereby anticipation - surrounding the next batch of Apple products.
Apple likes to spring surprises - and most often those surprises are pleasant. The unpleasant surprise of no firewire in the latest Macbook is far outmatched by positive surprises that Apple has sprung over the years.
I fully understand the difficulties that faces enterprise in not being able to plan 5 years ahead for tech purchases. But that simply is not a road Apple wants to go down, and I do not blame them. Innovation and secrecy around upcoming products is an integral part of Apple as a company, not just a part of Jobs ego.
OTOH, Apple's hard line stance surrounding limited (or zero) discounts for volume sales is something that, IMO, could be changed without locking Apple into the demands of enterprise.
Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:14 pm Subject:
Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:35 pm Subject: great quote john, it embodies your column perfectly
Your entire column is proof positive! It's not "conventional rules" it's good business. As someone who runs his own IT consulting shop, I cannot recommend Apple to my clients as a serious alternative because of their secrecy. It is important for businesses to know basic things, like EOL schedules and how serious the development team is taking certain security flaws. Apple refuses to release information on both of these topics because they don't want "to lose degrees of freedom."
I am not "reading the tea leaves," this isn't a prophecy, it's a judgment based on what judgments are supposed to be based on: past performance. I don't care who is in charge of the enterprise business at Apple, I only care HOW Apple conducts that business. I can tell you that his departure means nothing to me, how Apple behaves does. I don't care if Apple has "the best", which is a subjective statement, since the second best is at least close enough if not actually better than Apple's solutions. I can't tell a client to install Apple's OS on their servers if they cannot count on getting security updates from Apple 5 years from now if not 10. As you point out, Apple refuses to get themselves locked into a position where they would have to actually support their enterprise customers, and you consider that a good thing. Sadly, John, you are dead wrong. Reliability is what enterprise customers need, and Apple refuses to give that to them (note I don't mean OS reliability, I mean business reliability).
Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:36 pm Subject: Re: great quote john, it embodies your column perfectly
QuoteAnonymous wrote:
Your entire column is proof positive! It's not "conventional rules" it's good business. As someone who runs his own IT consulting shop, I cannot recommend Apple to my clients as a serious alternative because of their secrecy. It is important for businesses to know basic things, like EOL schedules and how serious the development team is taking certain security flaws. Apple refuses to release information on both of these topics because they don't want "to lose degrees of freedom."
I am not "reading the tea leaves," this isn't a prophecy, it's a judgment based on what judgments are supposed to be based on: past performance. I don't care who is in charge of the enterprise business at Apple, I only care HOW Apple conducts that business. I can tell you that his departure means nothing to me, how Apple behaves does. I don't care if Apple has "the best", which is a subjective statement, since the second best is at least close enough if not actually better than Apple's solutions. I can't tell a client to install Apple's OS on their servers if they cannot count on getting security updates from Apple 5 years from now if not 10. As you point out, Apple refuses to get themselves locked into a position where they would have to actually support their enterprise customers, and you consider that a good thing. Sadly, John, you are dead wrong. Reliability is what enterprise customers need, and Apple refuses to give that to them (note I don't mean OS reliability, I mean business reliability).
It is how you define a "good thing". It is a good thing for Apple to be able to move into a new area without worrying about backward compatibility for big enterprise accounts that just made their purchases and do not plan to move on for another 5-6 years.
But it is a bad thing when talking about Apple's abitlity to move into the enterprise sector. But that is making the mistaken assumption that Apple WANTS to move into the enterprise sector. Many think it is the better step for Apple even if it loses them degrees of freedom. Others (including those in charge at Apple) put degrees of freedom at a higher priority that gaining a foothold in the enterprise sector. Considering Apple is doing quite well as is, to include their reputation for being a front leading innovator, that is not a decision that can be called "wrong".
Comments are currently closed. Please email the author instead.
Recent Headlines - Updated November 8th
- Sat, 7:58 PM
- News - Apple TV 3.0.1 Update Fixes Missing Content Bug
- Fri, 7:45 PM
- Rumor - Taiwan Leak Shows Verizon UTMS/CDMA iPhone for Q3 2010
- 6:40 PM
- News - iPhone Moves Into RadioShack
- 6:30 PM
- News - Apple to Open Stunning Paris Apple Store in Le Louvre on Saturday
- 5:43 PM
- Free on iTunes - Dictionary, Dictionary, Dictionary, And More
- 4:09 PM
- John Martellaro's Blog - Particle Debris (week ending 11/6) Failure IS an Option
- 3:32 PM
- Games - The Latest App Store Games: Gravity Sling, RocketBird, Ground Effect, Checkers!
- 2:25 PM
- Games - Star Soccer 2010 for Mac Puts Gamers in Role of Up-and-Coming Player
- 2:15 PM
- How-To - The Mysteries of Rosetta Housekeeping
- 1:33 PM
- News - iPhone Game Developer Sued for Collecting User’s Cell Numbers
- 1:17 PM
- Games - Warhammer Online Expands Trial Play Option
- 11:19 AM
- Rumor - Apple May Be Bringing RFID to the iPhone
The Mac Observer Reader Specials
- TypeStyler For Mac OS X is Now Shipping! Download The Free Fully Functional 60 Day Tryout at www.typestyler.com
RamJet Memory: Mac Pro 8-core 8GB Kit $199.99, 4GB Kits $109.99! Sale on MacBook and MacBook Pro 8GB kits $549.99! New MacBook DDR3 2GB for $49.99. iMac and Mac mini 4GB Kits for $79.99! 1TB SATA Hard Drives for $109.99! Click here
OWC: Get the Right Memory for Your Mac Top Quality, Competitive Price, Lifetime Backed Free Expert Support + Installation Videos too! MacBook & mini 8GB, iMac 16GB, Mac Pro up to 32GB. Click here
If you're using a Mac, then you've gotta check out Full Tilt Poker for Mac. This Full Tilt Poker bonus code does the unthinkable, it actually rewards!For the latest Apple products use Ciao, a price comparison website, to find laptops like MacBook Air. Then find the best prices on MP3 players and use our comparison tool to evaluate mobile phones like the Apple iPhone.
Laptop Hardware Provided by TechRestore - Overnight Mac & iPod Repairs.
